Me (The Libertarian Homeschooler): What do you think about the war on drugs?
YS (Young Statesman, 14): I think it’s none of the state’s business what we can or cannot put into our bodies and what we can or cannot do with our money.
Me: But a lot of people die from drug overdoses. For whatever reason you aren’t likely to do that, but shouldn’t other people be protected from drugs and drug overdoses? Should they just be thrown to the wolves? Don’t we care about them?
YS: You’ve made a emotional argument.
Me: How do you combat that?
YS: You could say, “Are you saying it is the responsibility of the state to protect people from making bad choices?”
Me: Right. That’s the argument that the state should protect people from bad choices wrapped in a veiled personal attack: “You don’t care about other people. You’re a bad person.” But there’s another argument. Who determines what goes into your body? Who owns your body? That’s the most compelling argument.
YS: Do you own you or does the state own you?
Me: Yes. I think that’s the most important argument. Property rights. Who owns you? That can get lost. Why did it become difficult when it became about you caring about other people?
YS: Because it became an emotional argument.
Me: How did it feel when it became an emotional argument?
YS: Oh, God. Not this again.
Me: It’s a trap.
YS: It makes your brain stop working as well.
Me: What do you have to do when faced with a emotional argument?
YS: Think about the argument that’s being given to you. You have to make it about property rights again.
Me: Is that because most arguments boil down to property rights?
YS: If you’re arguing about feels, it’s because the other person is trying to shut the argument down. Most arguments are actually about property. You have to remove the emotion. You can’t follow that trail. That’s not the real argument.
Me: Is it possible that the other person doesn’t know the real argument? They don’t know what’s at stake?
YS: Yeah. They think it’s about protecting people from a small danger but there’s a bigger danger. You are trying to show them the rest of the picture. Yes, it’s important for people not to overdose but property rights are more important.
Me: The denial of property rights, in my opinion, is the greatest evil. When we deny people their property rights we have to tell lies and create systems to justify the denial. Those lies and those systems lead to violence and slaughter.
Donate to the Advocates!
Subscribe to the Liberator Online!Each issue brings you:
- Communication tips and techniques from leading libertarian communications experts including Sharon Harris, Michael Cloud and Dr. Mary Ruwart. Learn the best ways to communicate the ideas of liberty!
- Resources from across the liberty movement that apply libertarian insights to current events. Entertaining and enlightening political commentary.
- The first place for updates on the programs and resources from the Advocates for Self-Government.
- An ongoing introduction to, and exploration of, the ideas of liberty. -- Persuasive answers to the tough questions often asked about libertarianism.
- Special offers only for Liberator Online subscribers.
…and much more!
Archives by Date
TagsActivist Ammunition Ask Dr. Mary Ruwart Ask Dr. Ruwart big government Cato Institute CIA Congress Constitution Democrats Edward Snowden federal government freedom government Intellectual Ammunition Iraq James Harris Liberator Online libertarian libertarian ideas libertarianism libertarian movement Libertarian Party Libertarians libertarian society liberty marijuana NSA One-Minute Liberty Tip Operation Politically Homeless peace Persuasion PowerPoint President's Corner President Obama prohibition Rand Paul Reason TV Republicans Ron Paul Sharon Harris Syria They Said It Uber video war on drugs World's Smallest Political Quiz